X Greetings! You are not currently logged in, but please don't let that stop you from voting up any videos you like. :)
|
| |
|
westy Member Profile  Member Since: 2006-07-25 Last Power Points used: never • Available: now Max Power Points: 1 • Get More Power Points Now Comments |
Subscribe Navigation
Member Stats Highest Ranked Comments Member's Highest Rated Videos |
Science Videos Submitted by westy
if it was just the wogs then I could see how a dipshit oversensitive prick could be offended , but because Michal Jackson is white it makes 100% seance and anyone that's offended should be thrown into a pit of cow testicles and urinated on.
Westy. You obviously have no idea what the connotations of black face are, Racism and group superior.
If you have no problem with black face then you have no empathy for the millions of black americans it was use to offend belittle and degrade. It depicts blacks as unintelligent uneducated dancing singing jesters for your amusement.
" See, this what those silly blacks act like all the time when we aren't around. "
Black face was, and still is, an attack on black culture. No matter if you're aware of the offense or not.
It's racist and a flagrantly inaccurate stereotype encompassing people like Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass who were by no means unintelligent or less valuable than any of us today.
In conclusion, I submit your comment here is insensitive, ignorant and prickish.
I'm sad to see the videosift community has to endure statements of that nature. = /
I have no hard feelings against you or anything. I think your comment was over-the-top and I think it was an over-the-top reaction that you got hobbled for it too (hypocrisy abound). I think the best thing to do is put it past you and continue as before.
Just learn and grow from it. Make racist jokes again too, but be careful about them.
Cheers.
The next day they acidently drove into scaffolding and both brothers died instantly.
You're a prick Westy
lol so stupid how they jump to the conclusoin that tripping out is some how the person going to another place in actuality, rather than actually invistigating the more likely aspect that the drug simply makes people counchously aware of parts of the brain that are normally separated from the counchoise.
is your voting finger broke? come on..that was a great documentary!
In reply to this comment by westy:
they would never do this in the uk ! :'(
http://www.logicaldiscourseproject.org
and i understood that it was just an example.i responded to sia,but it pertains to your comment also.
i think i clarified my point..i tried to anyway.
the taliban is more about control of land and commerce than religion.its the religion they hide behind to enact their control.my response alludes to that.
also... are those things starting to itch yet?! only another week and a half to go, and then you can go back to neglecting the edit feature in proper form!
have a good one sir westy.
The judge determined that you were in fact just trying to scare the old ladies into dropping their groceries and didn't really want to kill anyone. Still guilty of reckless driving.
In reply to this comment by westy:
Update,,,
"You are guilty. I think your intention was ironic satire - but you are guilty. A driver can still be charged with reckless driving- even though it was surely not their intention to cause harm."
Well this analogy is not correct a corect analgy would be
1) A half blind policeman perceives a driver to be driving reckless and he happens to work for the half blind community where 30% are half blind
2) a judge determines that the guy was not driving reckless due to the fact that the only evidence is from sumone whose senses directly relating to the crime are compramized.
3)yet the juge decides to repramand the driver non the less in order to prove to the community that drunk driving will not be tolerated.
now you can see how this is not fair on the driver who was not driving bad in the first place?